




0^ ,i-^», -^^ -^ 










a V 



<^. * 




^ 




o V 



^°-^^ 




-^ 












'^> 







«- "> 





















: -^^ 




.>^ o. 







^"-'t. 







• • • ■ \'^ "^ 




..- A 







o V 





A^ o ° " « ♦ '<^>. 



' .. • 







. « - A <► 

J> c » * • . '<ts 



A^ .• 







'^^ 







,**.c:^.*-^. 










'.* 'P>. A* ♦■-rifMSJ' .-v y 






■A > O "_. " » ^ o V" 






■vv 'r^ •" ^^" <^ 














"°^*^^''^o'' V"^'\/^ "\.*^'^'\o'' 





V. c-^ 










' tf>..^'^ * 










v•-.7¥r^;/* \"-'?^-f-*/' 'V-^-"y 



^ 







.'^°^ 















• • • * *^ 




- '^'^o^ !''^^'-. '^o^^ :m^^\ 't^n^ »'.5?^i^'- -^^^^ ^^m>^\ '^^.^ 



^^-^K 




'>0^ 



* ^'?-' 



•I o 




v>o^ 







"^^- 






:t» a 













8809 



Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1979 



.A>" 



^' \ 




Copper Availability— Domestic 

A Minerals Availability System Appraisal 



By Rodney D. Rosenkranz, Robert L. Davidoff, 
and Jim F. Lemons, Jr. 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



(yVV 



Information Circular 8809 

/ 

Copper Availability— Domestic 

A Minerals Availability System Appraisal 



By Rodney D. Rosenkranz, Robert L. Davidoff, 
and Jim F. Lemons, Jr. 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Cecil D. Andrus, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 

Lindsay D. Norman, Acting Director 



As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior 
has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural 
resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water re- 
sources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and 
cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for 
the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses 
our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is 
in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major re- 
sponsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who 
live in Island Territories under U.S. administration. 



This publication has been cataloged as follows: 



Rosenkranz, Rodney D 

Copper availability - domestic. 

(Information circular • Bureau of Mines ; 8809) 
Bibliography; p. 27. 

1. Copper industry and trade— United States. 2. Copper— Statistics. 
I. Davidoff, Robert L., joint author. II. Lemons, Jim F., joint author. 
Ill, Title. IV. Series: United States. Bureau of Mines. Information 
circular ; 8809. 



TN295.U4 [HD9539.C7] 622'.08s [338.2'7'430973] 79-607772 



^ 

^v^ 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government I'riiiting Office 
Washington, D.C. 20402 

Stock Number 024-O04-O1954-'J 



•({ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1979 O— 302-234 



EXECUTIVE CORRESPONDENCE 



FOREWORD 

The Bureau of Mines Minerals Availability Program is assessing 
the worldwide availability of nonfuel minerals. The program identifies, 
collects, compiles, and evaluates information on active, developed, and 
explored mines and deposits, and on mineral processing plants worldwide. 
Objectives are to classify domestic and foreign resources, to identify 
by cost evaluation resources that are reserves, and to prepare analyses 
of mineral availabilities. 

This report is the first of a continuing series of MAS reports to 
analyze the supply of minerals from domestic and foreign sources. Analy- 
sis of supply from other minerals is currently in progress. Questions 
about the MAS program should be addressed to Director, Division of 
Minerals Availability, Bureau of Mines, 2401 E Street, NW. , Washington, 
D.C. 20241. 




RETURN THIS COVER WITH THE FILE COPIES TO ORIGINATING OFFICE 



CONTENTS 



Page 



f'oreword ill 

Abstract 1 

Introduction 2 

Acknowledgments 3 

Estimation of copper resource and cost data 5 

Supply of copper from domestic deposits 13 

General 13 

Total recoverable copper 15 

Annual recoverable copper 16 

Analysis of recent domestic copper prices, costs, and demand 21 

Copper price and capital and operating cost 21 

Environmental costs 24 

Domestic demand for copper 24 

Conclusions 25 

References 27 

Appendix 28 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

1. Flow chart of evaluation procedure 4 

2. Classification of mineral resources 6 

3. Location of domestic copper properties 8 

4. Copper contained in domestic deposits at various copper ore grades. 14 

5. Domestic copper reserve available at various copper prices 15 

6. Potential annual domestic production at various copper prices 17 

7. Potential domestic annual production schedule based on copper 

prices of $0.70 and $1.00 per pound and a 0-percent rate of 

return 18 

8. Potential domestic annual production schedule at various copper 

prices and a 15-percent rate of return 19 

9. Present and potential annual domestic production schedule based on 

a copper price of $1.00 per pound and a 15-percent rate of 

return 20 

10. Average annual copper price in actual dollars and in constant 1978 

dollars 21 

11. Comparison of copper price index and mine and mill capital cost 

index 2 2 

12. Annual recoverable copper available from domestic deposits over a 

copper price range of $0.50 to $1.50 24 



vi 



TABLES 

Page 

1» Example of deposit information required for financial evaluation of 

a copper property 7 

2. Byproduct and coproduct commodity prices 9 

3. Property status, mining method, and reserve base data 10 

4. Total recoverable copper available from producing, developed, past 

producer and explored deposits at various copper prices and a 

15-percent rate of return 16 

A-1. - Ownership and control of domestic copper properties 28 



COPPER AVAILABILITY - DOMESTIC 
A Minerals Availability System Appraisal 

by 

Rodney D. Rosenkranz, ' Robert L. Davidoff, ^ and Jim F. Lemons, Jr.^ 



ABSTRACT 

The Bureau of Mines evaluated the potential supply of primary copper 
from domestic mines and deposits and found that increases in copper price 
will be required in order for many domestic deposits to continue production. 
As part of the study, a tonnage-price relationship was developed indicating 
the quantity of copper that could be produced economically from known 
deposits at various copper prices and at various rates of return on the 
required capital investment. Costs of production are based on estimated 
capital and operating costs for mining, concentrating, transporting, 
smelting, and refining. Direct and indirect operating costs, recovery 
of investment, and return on investment have been included in the smelting 
and refining costs. Capital and operating costs are calculated in January 
19 78 dollars, and byproduct credits are based on January 19 78 prices. 

Known domestic copper mines and deposits contain nearly 92 million 
metric tons of copper in about 14 billion metric tons of demonstrated 
mineralized material. These tonnages represent the current domestic copper 
reserve base. Approximately 74 million metric tons of copper are recoverable 
from the reserve base using existing technology. Of this quantity, slightly 
more than 50 million metric tons are economically recoverable assuming a 
price of $1.00 per pound of copper, credit for the recovery of byproducts, 
and a 15-percent rate of return on capital investment. Approximately 60 
percent of the copper occurs in mines that were producing at the time of 
the study. 



* Mineral economist. 

* Metallurgist. 

All authors are with the Minerals Availability Field Office, Bureau of 
Mines, Denver, Colo. 



INTRODUCTION 

Since World War II, the United States has become a major Importer 
of many mineral commodities basic to an Industrialized economy. Prior to 
World War II, the United States was virtually self-sufficient for its supply 
of copper and was a major exporter. However, because of world population 
growth and rising standards of living, competition for world supplies of 
raw materials has Increased steadily during the last 30 years. Therefore, 
it is necessary that we continually appraise our mineral supply position, 
noting the conditions affecting the availability of these minerals from 
domestic sources. Personnel of the Bureau of Mines are continually 
analyzing the domestic supply and demand of copper to provide data for 
the formulation of mineral policy. 

This study, based on 1978 data, is an evaluation of domestic copper 
reserves. The objectives follow: 

1. To estimate the capital Investments and operating costs 
for appropriate mining and concentrating methods. To 
determine the operating cost for toll smelting and refining. 
To estimate the transportation cost of intermediate products 
to a smelter and refinery. 

2. To evaluate the quantity and quality of domestic copper 
resources in relation to physical, technological, institutional, 
and other conditions that affect production from each deposit. 

3. To perform a cost analysis for each deposit. The results of 
these analyses indicate the unit prices and associated tonnages 
of refined copper that can be produced at specific prices. 

4. To combine and analyze the price-production relationships 
for all deposits to show the domestic copper production 
potential at various metal prices and at various returns 
on the capital investment. 

The data required for this study were developed at Bureau of Mines 
Field Operations Centers in Denver, Colo., Juneau, Alaska, Pittsburgh, Pa., 
and Spokane, Wash. Evaluators in these offices derived this information 
from company data, published data, and trips to the mines and deposits. 
When necessary, data were calculated by the evaluator. Select data are 
stored, retrieved, and analyzed in a computerized component of the Minerals 
Availability System (MAS). 

The Bureau of Mines has conducted minerals availability studies in the 
past that have become quickly obsolete with changes in the influencing 
factors. Previous Bureau of Mines studies of domestic copper resources 
were based on 1964 data O ) ' and 1970 data (2^). Results of the current 
study differ from those of the previous studies because additional cost 
and resource data have become available. 

'Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references 
preceding the appendix. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The authors wish to thank Harold J. Schroeder, and James H. Jolly of 
the Bureau of Mines, Division of Nonferrous Metals, for their assistance 
in determining the properties and associated resource tonnages included 
in this report. Production and cost data for the deposits analyzed in 
this study were developed at Bureau of Mines Field Operations Centers in 
Denver, Colo., Juneau, Alaska, Pittsburgh, Pa,, and Spokane, Wash. The 
Minerals Availability Field Office in Denver performed financial evaluations 
on the properties and prepared this report. 

The following Bureau of Mines personnel contributed to the study: 

Alaska Field Operations Center, Juneau, Alaska: 

David Carnes 

Eastern Field Operations Center, Pittsburgh, Pa.: 

Alice V. Brocoum Ronald R. Potts 
Travis Q. Lyday Allan T. Schmidt 

C.P. Mishra David C. Uhrin 

Intermountain Field Operations Center, Denver, Colo.: 

Roger L. Baer Howard E. McKinney 

Michael R. Daley Cesar M. Palencia 

Theodore A. Drescher Richard A. Salisbury 

Alan G. Hite R. Craig Smith 

Jerry D. Lewis Barbara J. West 

Western Field Operations Center, Spokane, Wash.: 

Burton B. Gosling Ransom F. Read 

Charles T. Hillman William L. Rice 

Nathan T. Lowe Otto L. Schumacher 

Paul Pierce Nicholas Wetzel 

Minerals Availability Field Office, Denver, Colo,: 

Donald I. Bleiwas Richard J. Fantel 
Luis V. Coppa Rodney J. Minarik 







c o 

o a 

o ^ 
UJ 



I 



o 
o c -- 

0) — 

— o 

<u > 
to 



n 



u 
o 





























1 o 


n 










fe 






■•- 




1 - ® *= c 
o »_ — <c en 


1 

O 1 




CO 


4-0 0) 










c 

0) 
CO c 


•1- 


1 « -^ *- -^- -• ■■ 

* «) O U5 — 




< 


3 -H «n 
Q. o o 










< o 
2 E 


o * 


1 f 3 O >,2 XI 1 




i 


£ T3 J3 










O) <»- 


, 5 T3 O CO -^ 


1 






o 

o 












XI 


1 - 1 
















a. 




i 


^ 




i 


k 




ik 












i 


k 


























c 
































o 






















C -1- 

— «n 
*" o 


c 
o 

••- 


-► 


o 


o 
n 


o 






























0) <j 


a 

3 




a. 
a> 


Q) 


D 






























«= XI 






Q 




0) 












<u 


a> 

XI 


c 
o 




UJ 


> 
0) 








Q. 


























Ol 


o 


o 


































o 

c 
c 


CT 


'i 




























k 












i 






C (A 




o 

t- 


c 
o 


a> 

■»- 






















^ °-^ 








0> 

■D 






















F 




o X. *- o 
























i 


k 






— o "> <» 
























+- - XI 
























C 0, 


































■o o 



























































Qi 

ID 
O 



ESTIMATION OF COPPER RESOURCE AND COST DATA 

The flow of the MAS evaluation process from deposit identification 
to development of supply information is illustrated in figure 1. This 
flowsheet shows the various evaluation stages required to make a determin- 
ation of the availability of copper from a property. 

Seventy-three domestic mines and deposits were selected for analysis 
in this study. Selection was limited to major, known deposits that had 
demonstrated copper reserves or resources. Reserves are material that 
can be mined, processed, and marketed at a profit under the economic and 
technologic conditions prevailing at the time of the evaluation. Resources 
are concentrations of naturally occurring solid, liquid, or gaseous materials 
in or on the Earth's crust in such form that economic extraction of a 
commodity is currently or potentially feasible. Most reserve and resource 
tonnage and grade calculations presented in this paper have been ccmputed 
partly from specific measurements, samples, or production data and partly 
from projection for a reasonable distance on geologic evidence. Many of 
these estimates were listed in company publications. Tonnage estimates 
presented in this report are reported in metric tons. For converting from 
metric tons to short tons multiply by 1.10231. 

Using these reserve and resource estimates, the domestic copper reserve 
base was established. The reserve base is the in-place portion of demon- 
strated (measured and indicated) resources from which reserves are estimated. 

4 

The reserve base includes resources that have the probability of being 
economically available and is composed of resource categories that are 
economic (reserves), marginally economic (marginal reserves), and sub- 
economic (resources). The position of the reserve base within the class- 
ification of mineral resources is illustrated in figure 2. 

Approximately 40 percent of the properties analyzed were in production 
at the time of the study. These mines accounted for more than 95 percent of 
the domestic mine production of copper during 1978. About 60 percent of the 
copper reserve base occurs in properties that are currently producing. 

After a deposit was identified for inclusion in the supply analysis, 
an evaluation of the property was begun. For mines currently in produc- 
tion, the designed mining and milling production rates and capacities and 
other available production specifics were adapted for use in this study. 
For deposits not in production, appropriate mining and concentrating methods, 
production rates, and other production parameters were assumed. These evalu- 
ations were accomplished at Bureau of Mines Field Operations Centers in 
Denver, Colo., Juneau, Alaska, Pittsburgh, Pa., and Spokane, Wash. 

Information on the average grades, ore tonnages, and different physical 
characteristics affecting production from domestic copper deposits was obtain- 
ed from numerous sources, including Bureau of Mines and Geological Survey 
publications, professional journals, industry publications, annual reports, 
company lOK reports and prospectuses filed with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission, and data made available to the Bureau of Mines by private 
companies. The personal knowledge and judgments of Bureau of Mines engineers 
were utilized in many cases. 



TOTAL RESOURCES 



IDENTIFIED 




UNDISCOVERED 



INFERRED 



HYPOTHETICAL 



SPECULATIVE 



FIGURE 2. - Classification of mineral resources. 

Capital expenditures were calculated for exploration, acquisition, develop- 
ment, mine equipment, and for constructing and equipping the concentrating 
plant. Investments were included for working capital and for replacement of 
worn equipment. Operating costs for mining and concentrating include direct 
and Indirect operating costs, taxes, insurance, transportation, and royalty. 
Costs for smelting and refining include direct and indirect operating costs, 
taxes, insurance, recovery of investment, and return on investment. 



TABLE 1. - Example of deposit information required for financial 

evaluation of a copper property 



Category description and units 



Year of occurrence 


Category 






value 


Beginning 


Ending 




19 78 


1979 


$470 


1980 


1980 


$538 


1979 


1980 


$1,791 


1979 


1980 


$898 


1979 


1979 


$2,286 


1980 


1980 


$2,846 


1984 


1984 


$604 


1985 


1985 


$632 


1986 


1986 


$955 


1987 


1987 


$2,292 


1990 


1990 


$1,198 


1991 


1991 


$1,244 


19 79 


1980 


$18,703 


1981 


1981 


$2,366 


1981 


1995 


$1,450 


1981 


1995 


$1,700 


1981 


1995 


4,520,000 


1981 


1995 


0.43 


1981 


1995 


93.00 


1981 


1995 


28.00 


1981 


19 95 


98.00 


1981 


1995 


98.00 


1981 


1995 


99.90 


1981 


1995 


$93.00 


1981 


1995 


$192.00 


1981 


1995 


$6.90 



Exploration $1 ,000 

Land acquisition. $1 ,000 

Mining preparation $1 ,000 

Mine plant $1 ,000 

Mine equipment $1 ,000 

Do $1,000 

Mine equipment reinvestment ... .$1 ,U00 

Do $1,000 

Do $1,000 

Do $1 ,000 

Do $1,000 

Do $1 ,000 

Mill plant and equipment $1,000 

Working capital $1,000 

Mine operating cost $/MT ore 

Mill operating cost $/MT ore 

Ore mined per year metric tons 

Copper: 

Feed grade percent Cu 

Mill recovery percent 

Concentrate grade percent Cu 

Smelter recovery percent 

Smelter grade percent Cu 

Refinery recovery percent 

Smelter operating cost....$/MT cone 
Refinery operating cost 

$/MT blister 

Transportation to smelter. $/MT cone 
Transportation to refinery 

$/MT blister 

Molybdenum: 

Feed grade percent Mo 

Mill recovery percent 

Concentrate grade percent Mo 

Price $/pound 

Gold: 

Feed grade troy ounces/MT 

Mill recovery percent 

Concentrate grade. .. .troy ounces/MT 

Smelter recovery percent 

Selling price $/troy ounce 

Silver: 

Feed grade troy ounces/MT 

Mill recovery percent 

Concentrate grade. .. .troy ounces/MT 

Smelter recovery percent 

Selling price $/troy ounce 



1981 



19 95 



$9.90 



1981 


1995 


0.013 


1981 


1995 


63.00 


1981 


1995 


50.00 


1981 


1995 


$4.01 


1981 


1995 


0.003 


1981 


1995 


90.00 


1981 


1995 


0.20 


1981 


1995 


95.00 


1981 


19 95 


$173.69 


1981 


1995 


0.06 


1981 


1995 


90.00 


1981 


1995 


3.53 


1981 


1995 


95.00 


1981 


1995 


$4.93 




J) 

O 



<0 
.£3 

E 

3 
C 

X 

0> 

-a 
c 

o. 
a 

E 



E 

3 






0) 
Q. 
O 



0) 
Q. 
Q. 
O 
U 



E 
o 



c 
o 

o 
u 
o 



CO 

LU 

O 



10 



TABLE 3. - Property status, mining method, and reserve base data^ 

(Prd - producer: Dev - developed deposit: Exp - explored deposit: 
Ppd - past producer: OP - open pit: UG - underground: L - leach: 
W - withheld to avoid disclosing individual company confidential data; 
included in "other properties:" NA - not available: NAp - not applicable.) 



Property name 



Map 
index 
No.^ 



Status^ 



Mining 
me t hod 



Grade- 
(percent 
copper) 



Reserve base 
(thousand metric tons) 



Mineralized 
material ^ 



Contained 
copper 



Alaska: 

Arctic Camp 1 

Bond Creek 

orange Hill 2 

Bornite 3 

Brady Glacier 4 

Yakobi Island 5 

Arizona: 

Bagdad 6 

Bluebird 7 

Casa Grande 8 

Christmas 9 

Copper Basin 10 

Cyprus Johnson 

Camp 11 

Dubacher Canyon. . . 12 

Espe ranza 13 

Florence Conoco. . . 14 

Helvetia East 15 

Helvetia West 16 

Inspiration Area.. 17 

Lakes hore 18 

Magma (Superior).. 19 

Metcalf 20 

Miami East 21 

Miami Leach 22 

Mineral Park 23 



Exp 



OP/UG 



4.00 



30,840 



1,234 



Exp 


OP 


W 


W 


W 


Exp 


UG 


5.30 


12,000 


636 


Exp 


UG 


W 


W 


W 


Exp 


OP 


W 


W 


W 


Prd 


OP 


.49 


263,040 


1,289 


Prd 


OP 


.35 


19,050 


67 


Prd 


L 


.49 


58,900 


289 


Exp 


UG 


1.00 


317,460 


3,175 


Ppd 


OP 


.54 


14,000 


76 


Exp 


OP 


.43 


9,000 


39 


Exp 


UG 


1.59 


31,130 


495 


Exp 


OP 


.55 


158,730 


873 


Prd 


L 


.85 


20,000 


170 


Exp 


L 


.80 


18,140 


145 


Ppd 


OP 


.42 


19,820 


83 


Exp 


OP 


.39 


453,590 


1,769 


Exp 


L 


.32 


226,800 


726 


Exp 


OP 


.54 


305,670 


1,651 


Exp 


L 


.55 


19,950 


110 


Exp 


OP 


.78 


12,470 


97 


Prd 


OP 


.56 


166,120 


930 


Ppd 


UG 


.70 


239,000 


1,664 


Ppd 


UG 


.71 


186,000 


1,312 


Prd 


UG 


4.50 


7,260 


327 


Prd 


OP 


.78 


353,110 


2,754 


Dev 


UG 


1.95 


49,890 


973 


Prd 


L 


W 


W 


W 


Prd 


OP 


.30 


44,940 


135 



See footnotes at end of table. 



11 



TABLE 3. - Property status, mining method, and reserve base data ' 



Property name 



Map Status' Mining 
Index method 

No.* 



Grade" 

(percent 

copper) Mineralized Contained 



Reserve base 
(thousand metric tons) 



material' 



copper 



Arizona - 
continued: 
Mission 

San Xavler 24 

Morencl 25 

New Cornelia 

(Ajo) 26 

Oracle Ridge 27 

Ox Hide 28 

Palo Verde 29 

Peacock..' 30 

Pima... 31 

Pinto Valley 32 

Ray 33 

Red Mountain 34 

Sacaton, West 35 

East 35 

Safford Inspira- 
tion (Sanchez).. 36 
Safford Kennecott. 37 
Safford Phelps 

Dodge 38 

San Manuel 39 

Kalamazoo 39 

Slerrlta 40 

Sliver Bell 41 

Twin Buttes 42 

Van Dyke 43 

Vekol Hills 44 

California: 

Lights Creek 45 

Walker 46 

Michigan: 

Presque Isle 47 

White Pine 48 



Prd 


OP 


.60 


246,120 


1,477 


Prd 


OP 


.81 


555,010 


4,496 


Prd 


OP 


0.66 


93,420 


617 


Dev 


UG 


2.28 


10,250 


234 


Prd 


L 


.29 


36,100 


103 


Prd 


OP 


.63 


141,950 


894 


Ppd 


OP 


.50 


18,140 


91 


Prd 


OP 


.48 


132,430 


636 


Prd 


OP 


.45 


272,000 


1,224 


Exp 


OP 


.34 


136,000 


462 


Prd 


OP 


.79 


595,430 


4,704 


Exp 


UG 


.71 


100,000 


710 


Prd 


OP 


.70 


19,170 


134 


Exp 


UG. 


1.25 


13,510 


169 


Dev 


OP 


.40 


181,400 


726 


Dev 


L 


.50 


453,600 


2,268 


Dev 


UG 


.72 


362,810 


2,612 


Prd 


UG 


.70 


416,000 


2,912 


Exp 


UG 


.72 


512,500 


3,690 


Prd 


OP 


.32 


417,090 


1,335 


Prd 


OP 


.66 


23,640 


156 


Prd 


OP 


.67 


298,410 


1,999 


Prd 


OP 


1.10 


51,700 


569 


Exp 


L 


.50 


90,700 


454 


Exp 


OP 


.54 


95,000 


513 


Exp 


OP 


W 


W 


W 


Ppd 


UG 


W 


W 


W 


Exp 


UG 


1.27 


95,240 


1,210 


Prd 


UG 


1.24 


332,240 


4,120 


Prd 


UG 


1.35 


29,030 


392 



See footnotes at end of table. 



12 



TABLE 3. - Property status, mining method, and reserve base data^ 



Property name 



Map 
index 
No.* 



Status^ 



Mining 
method 



Grade- 
(percent 
copper) 



Reserve base 
(thousand metric tons) 



Mineralized 
material' 



Contained 
copper 



Minnesota: 

Minnamax 49 

Ely Spruce 50 

Montana: 

Butte 51 

Heddleston 52 

Stillwater 53 

Troy 54 

Nevada: 

Hall 55 

New Ruth 56 

Victoria 57 

Yerington 58 

New Mexico: 

Chino 59 

Continental 

Underground ... 60 
Continental 

Surface 61 

Hillsboro 

(Copper Flat). . 62 

Nacimiento 63 

Pinos Altos 64 

Tyrone 65 



Exp 


UG 


W 


W 


W 


Exp 


OP 


W 


W 


W 


Prd 


OP 


W 


w 


w 


Exp 


UG 


W 


w 


w 


Exp 


OP 


0.48 


84,350 


405 


Exp 


OP 


.25 


136,960 


342 


Dev 


UG 


.74 


58,060 


430 


Exp 


OP 


W 


W 


W 


Ppd 


OP 


.79 


21,530 


170 


Ppd 


L 


.20 


NA 


M 


Ppd 


UG 


W 


W 


W 


Ppd 


OP 


w 


W 


W 


Prd 


OP 


w 


W 


W 


Prd 


UG 


2.06 


17,050 


351 


Prd 


OP 


.86 


16,420 


141 


Exp 


OP 


W 


W 


W 


Ppd 


L 


.67 


6,740 


45 


Exp 


OP 


2.00 


7,000 


140 


Prd 


OP 


.82 


273,380 


2,242 


Prd 


L 


.32 


NA 


NA 



Tennessee: 
Copperhill 

Utah: 

Bingham. . . . 
Carr Fork. , 



66 



67 
68 



Prd 



Prd 
Dev 



UG/OP 



OP 
UG 



W 



.70 
1.84 



1,396,800 
55,510 



W 



9,778 
1,021 



See footnotes at end of table. 



13 



TABLE 3. - Property status » mining method, and reserve base data' 



Property name 



Map Status^ Mining 
Index method 

No. 2 



Grade** 

(percent 

copper) 



Reserve base 

(thousand metric tons) 

Mineralized Contained 

material' copper 



Washington: 

Sunrise 69 

Wisconsin: 

Crandon 70 

Flambeau 71 

Pelican River.... 72 

Wyoming : 

Klrwin... 73 

Other properties . . . NAp 



Ppd 



UG 



W 



W 



W 



Total, 



NAp 



Exp 


UG 


W 




W 


W 


Exp 


OP 


5.11 




2,590 


132 


Exp 


UG 


3.02 




2,850 


86 


Exp 


UG 


1.00 




1,450 


15 


Exp 


OP 


.75 




63,500 


476 


NAp 


NAp 
NAp 


NAp 


3, 


,018,920 


15,960 


NAp 


.66 


13, 


,928,910 


91,660 



^Additional property Informatlqn Is given In table A-1. 

^Map Index numbers refer to numbers on figure 3. 

^Status as of February 1979. Producing properties that have additional ore 

bodies with developed or explored status have been labeled as such. 
■•Units of grade are in weight-percent copper; copper grade from published sources. 
^Demonstrated (measured + indicated) estimates from published sources. 



SUPPLY OF COPPER FROM DOMESTIC DEPOSITS 



General 

Reserve and resource tonnage and grade estimates presented in this study 
are based on the demonstrated resources for each deposit. As illustrated in 
figure 2, demonstrated resources Include both measured and indicated reserves 
and resources. The reserve base, established to estimate copper reserves and 
resources, is that portion of demonstrated resources that have a probability 
of economic availability. For 1978, the domestic copper reserve base is 
estimated to be 92 million metric tons of copper. Of this amount, an estimated 
56 million metric tons occur in the reserves and resources of mines that were 
producing at the time of the study, and 36 million metric tons occur in un- 
developed deposits and closed mines. 



14 




20 30 40 50 60 70 80 

CONTAINED COPPER (million metric tons) 



FIGURE 4. - Copper contained in domestic deposits at various copper ore grades. 

As exploration and development yield a better knowledge of grades and 
tonnages, portions of the material may be reclassified. Historically, 
domestic resources that can be produced economically have increased annually 



15 



because of exploration and technologic improvements that enable the mining 
of lower grade material or the processing of material previously considered 
waste. Production from some deposits included in the study may be limited 
by environmental constraints. 

The domestic copper reserve base was derived by multiplying the resources 
of each deposit by the associated copper grade. Copper contained at various 
copper grades is illustrated in figure 4. Copper from some waste-leaching 
operations was not included in the reserve base because of low recovery 
factors and difficulties in estimating waste tonnages. 

Supply curves have been developed to illustrate total and annual domestic 
resources. These curves show the quantity of copper that is recoverable using 
current technology after all mining and processing losses are considered. 
Approximately 81 percent of the domestic copper reserve base is recoverable 
using current technology. 

Total Recoverable Copper 



Not all of the copper contained in an ore body can actually be recovered 
Some ore may not be recoverable because of the mining method used. Other 
losses occur as the ore is processed through the concentrating, smelting, and 
refining stages. Recoveries vary widely from operation to operation. An in 
situ leach operation may recover only 30 percent of the contained copper, 
while a sulfide float operation may recover as much as 9 5 percent. 



2.50 
2.25 
2.00 
1.75 



o 

T3 



Q. 

(T 
UJ 
Q. 
Q. 
O 
O 



.25 - 



1 1 r 1 1 r 

Total copper recoverable from the domestia copper 
reserve base; copper price based on 1978 costs 

15— percent rate of return 
— percent rate of return 



J 




X 



_L 



J. 



X 



T 



J. 



10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 

RECOVERABLE COPPER (million metric tons) 

FIGURE 5. - Domestic copper reserve available at various copper prices. 



90 



16 



TABLE 4. - Total recoverable copper available from producing, developed, 
past producer and explored deposits at various copper 
prices and at a 15-percent rate of return 
(thousand metric tons) 



Copper 


Producing 


Developed 


Past producer 


Cumulative 


price 


deposits^ 


deposits 


and explored 




(cents per pound) 






deposits 




Less than 50. . . . 


10,398 








10,398 


50 - 59 


4,283 





185 


14,866 


60 - 69 


5,323 


278 





20,467 


70 - 79 


7,061 





39 7 


27,925 


80 - 89 


10,745 


427 


2,149 


41,246 


90 - 99 


6,028 





1,421 


48,695 


100 - 124 


2,869 


4,049 


9,328 


64,941 


More than 124. . . . 





488 


8,882 


74,311 


Total 


46,707 


5,242 


22,362 


74,311 







^Includes deposits that may be temporarily inactive. 

Figure 5 shows the total quantity of copper recoverable at various 
copper prices and at 0- and 15-percent rates of return. At a copper price 
of $2.07 per pound, 74 million metric ton§ are potentially recoverable. At 
this price, all properties are eble to receive at least a 0-percent rate 
of return and many properties can operate at a profit. A price of $3.81 
would be required if all deposits were to receive at least a 15-percent 
rate of return. At the January 1978 price of $0.64 per pound, 24 million 
metric tons are recoverable at a 0-percent rate of return and 20 million 
metric tons at 15 percent. 

The amount of copper recoverable at various copper prices from pro- 
ducing, developed, and past producer and explored deposits at a 15-percent 
rate of return is shown in table 4. Analyses indicate that a total of 47 
million metric tons is recoverable from properties that are currently 
producing, 5 million metric tons from developed deposits, and 2 2 million 
metric tons from deposits that are either past producers or have been 
explored. 



Annual Recoverable Copper 

The annual mine production capacity of copper at various price levels 
and 0- and 15-percent rates of return is illustrated in figure 6. The curve 
is based on current and projected production capacities at producing and 
nonproducing deposits that were included in the copper reserve base. A 
copper price of $2.07 per pound would be required for all properties to 
receive at least a 0-percent rate of return and supply the maximum 



17 



annual production of 2.8 million metric tons. At a copper price of $3.81 
all properties would receive at least a 15-percent rate of return. The 
expected annual production of recoverable copper at a price of $0.75 could 
be 1.6 million and 1.0 million metric tons at 0- and 15-percent rates of 
return, respectively. These annual tonnage data indicate only the potential 
amount of copper that could be produced at a specific price for any given 
year. They do not indicate the duration of production or the desirability 
of actually supplying this annual production capacity. The curve does 
not consider increased annual production due to exploration and technologic 
improvements that enable the mining of lower grade material or the process- 
ing of material previously considered waste. 

It should be noted that an increase in production cannot be obtained 
immediately by increasing the price. The time required to increase produc- 
tion depends on factors such as the relative location of the deposit and 
the necessity for exploration, development, and plant construction. Other 
time delays result because overlying mineralized material of significantly 
different grade or mineral characteristics, requiring a different mining 
method, must be removed prior to mining underlying material. Figures 7, 
8, and 9 indicate annual production schedules when these time delays are 
considered. 





2.50 




2.25 


c 

3 
O 

a. 


2.00 
1.75 


a. 




(0 


1.50 


D 




o 
3 


1.25 


UJ 

o 
q: 


1.00 


UJ 

a. 

Q. 

o 
o 


.75 
.50 




.25 



T 



X 



T" 



T 



1 1 1 

Potential copper that could be produced at a specific price based 
on the 1978 copper reserve base and 1978 costs; duration of 
production not shown 

i5-percent rate of return 

0— percent rate of return 



^ J 



f- - ' 



J. 



J. 



X 



-L 



J. 



-L 



300 600 900 1,200 1,500 l,8C0 2,100 2,400 2,700 

ANNUAL RECOVERABLE COPPER (thousund metric tons) 



J 



3,000 



FIGURE 6. - Potential annual domestic production at various copper prices. 



18 



2,600 



2,400 - 



2,200 - 



2,000 

in 

Z 1,800 



E 



1,600 - 



1,400 - 



o 

■^ 1,200 
q: 

UJ 

I 1,000 



UJ 

_i 
m 
< 

UJ 

> 

o 
o 

UJ 

q: 



800 - 



600 - 



400 - 



200 




1978 1980 



1985 



1990 



1995 



2000 



2005 



2010 



FIGURE 7. - Potential domestic annual production schedule based on copper prices of $0.70 
and $1.00 per pound and a 0-percent rate of return. 

Figure 7 illustrates the annual production capacity at copper prices 
of $0.70 and $1.00 and at a 0-percent rate of return (break-even). This 
curve shows that at a copper price of $0.70, 1,240,000 metric tons of 
copper could be produced in 1984, with production quickly decreasing after- 
wards. At a price of $1.00, annual production could reach 2,450,000 metric 
tons before output would begin to decrease. 

Figure 8 shows the annual mine production capacity of copper at prices 
of $0.70, $1.00, and $2.00 per pound and at a 15-percent rate of return. 
A maximum of 885,000 metric tons is available annually at $0.70 per pound. 



19 



2,800 



2,400 - 



o 2,000 



E 
■o 
o 1,600 

O 



liJ 

CL 

a. 
o 
o 



m 

< 
ir 

LiJ 

> 

o 
u 

UJ 

q: 



1,200 



800 



400 




^1.00 per pound 



\ 



\ 



\. 



N 



$0.70 per pound 



\ 



1978 1980 



1985 



1990 



1995 



2000 



I I 

2005 2010 



FIGURE 8. - Potential domestic annual production schedule at various copper prices 
and a 15-percent rate of return. 



21 



at this price most of the copper is available from mines that are currently 
producing. Annual production from producing mines could reach a maximum of 
1,485,000 metric tons within 1 year but would drop to 1,040,000 metric tons 
within 20 years. Nonproducing mines could be developed to produce 340,000 
metric tons by 1983, with production from these mines dropping to 200,000 
metric tons in 1993. 



ANALYSIS OF RECENT DOMESTIC COPPER PRICES, COSTS, AND DEMAND 

Copper Price and Capital and Operating Cost 

Since 1965, the price of copper has increased from $0.35 to $0.67 per 
pound, an increase of 4.7 percent compounded annually. However, in constant 
1978 dollars, copper price has actually decreased. This is illustrated in 
figure 10. Using the implicit price deflator for gross national product. 



105 



35 




Constant 1978 dollars 



Actual dollars 



X 



X 



X 



X 



X 



X 



X 



X 



X 



1965 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 

FIGURE 10. - Average annual copper price in actual dollars and in constanf 1978 dollars. 



22 



O 
o 

II 
lO 



X 

LJ 
O 



240 



230 



220 



210 



200. 



± 190 



LlI 

cr 
a. 

cr 

UJ 

a. 
a. 
o 



UJ 

I- 

UJ 

> 



< 

I- 

a. 
< 



180 



70 



60 



50 



40 



130 



20 



00 



Mineandmill ^ 

capital cost index — >/ 




1965 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 



FIGURE 11. - Comparison of copper price index and mine and mill capital cost index. 



23 

average annual copper price was converted to constant 1978 dollars (9^). As 
shown on the curve, the average annual constant dollar price of copp'er rose 
from $0.72 per pound in 1965 to a high of $1.01 in 1974, and then dropped to 
a low of $0.67 in 1978. 

A comparison was also made between copper price and mine and mill capital 
cost. The year 1965 was established as the base year, and an index of 100 was 
assigned. Indexes for copper price were determined by dividing the actual 
dollar price for each year by the average 1965 price and multiplying by 100. 
Indexes for mine and mill capital costs were determined using the MAS cost- 
updating method (8^). Cost indexes for mine and mill capital cost were calcu- 
lated and averaged to arrive at the indexes used in this study. Results are 
shown in figure 11. 

Between 1965 and 1978, mine and mill capital costs increased 135 percent, 
an average of 6.3 percent compounded annually. Mine and mill operating costs 
increased at about the same rate. However, during this period, the price of 
copper increased only 90 percent. As a result, domestic copper producers were 
unable to totally recover increased costs by passing them on to the consumer. 
Because of this, many mines implemented other means of increasing revenues or 
lowering costs. These included 

1. Mining high-grade ore. 

2. Laying off employees. 

3. Temporarily shutting down. 

4. Implementing more efficient processing techniques. 

Because of high costs and low prices, several mines have been forced 
to curtail production. Other producers have had to operate at a copper 
price that did not provide an adequate profit. The increases in copper 
price that occurred in early 1979 should increase the profits of producers 
and encourage development of additional deposits. 

It has been estimated that the capital cost per annual metric ton 
of refined copper now ranges between $7,200 and $7,700 (^, 10^). This 
cost includes bringing the mine into production and the plant and equipment 
required to process the copper through the mining, milling, smelting, and 
refining stages. Based on this estimate, an integrated operation capable 
of producing 100,000 metric tons of refined copper per year would cost 
$720 to $770 million. Based on the capital cost index discussed above, 
this same plant would have cost $300 to $330 million in 196 5. 

Mine and mill operating costs are more difficult to estimate. These 
costs sometimes differ greatly, depending on factors such as capacity, loca- 
tion, ore grade, rock characteristics, and type of operation. Using the 
data developed for this study, estimates have been made of the direct and 
indirect operating cost for mining by open pit and underground methods and 
for concentrating the ore. The 1978 operating costs used in this study for 
open pit and underground mining averaged $2.41 and $8.61, respectively, per 
metric ton of ore. The average 1978 operating cost to concentrate 1 metric 
ton of ore by basic flotation methods was $2.79. 



24 



Environmental Costs 

According to industry information, pollution control expenditures 
have added significant costs to the copper industry in recent years. Most 
of these expenditures have been for the purchase of pollution control equip- 
ment at copper smelters. Since 1969, the Cities Service Co. has spent $48 
million for pollution control systems at the Copperhill operation (_5). The 
Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co. has spent $70 million on pollution 
control equipment at its Inspiration, Ariz., smelter (6), 

Several sources have estimated that expenditures for pollution control 
equipment have added 15 cents per pound to the cost of producing refined 
copper (1, 10). Because of the depressed copper price in recent years and 
the oversupply of copper, producers have been unable to pass this added 
cost on to the consumer. Unlike the domestic industry, most foreign pro- 
ducers have not had to implement pollution control measures. As a result, 
copper produced in other countries has a cost advantage over U.S. production. 

Domestic Demand for Copper 

Between 1969 and 1978, 67 percent of U.S. copper demand, excluding 
stock changes, was met from domestic mine production, 21 percent from old 
scrap, and 12 percent from net imports. During these years, total U.S. 



1.50 
1.40 
1.30 
1.20 
1. 10 - 
1.00 - 

.90- 

.80 - 

.70 

.60 



.50 



1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Potential copper that could be produced at a specific price based 
on the 1978 copper reserve base and 1978 costs; duration of 
production not shown 

15-percent rate of return 

— percent rate of return 



^j 






. _i 



^r 




J- 



J- 



J. 



X 



J. 



300 600 900 1,200 1,500 1,800 2,100 2,400 2,700 3,000 

ANNUAL RECOVERABLE COPPER (thousand metric tons) 



FIGURE 12. - Annual recoverable copper available from domestic deposits over a copper 
price range of $0.50 to $1.50 per pound. 



25 

demand for copper averaged 2,012,000 metric tons per year. Of this amount, 
1,337,000 metric tons was from domestic production, 427,000 metric tons from 
scrap, and 248,000 metric tons from net imports (7). 

Using the curves derived in this study, the copper price required 
to meet various levels of supply can be predicted. Figure 12 shows the 
available annual supply of recoverable copper at prices from $0.50 to 
$1.50. Forty-five deposits would be able to produce at a price of $1.00 
and receive a rate of return of at least 15 percent. 

The break-even copper price (based on a weighted average of capacity 
and cost for each property) was $0.66 per pound in 1978. This was about 
equal to the average market price during the year. In January 197 8, copper 
was selling for $0.64 per pound. Analysis indicates that at this price, 
only 12 properties could produce and receive at least a 15-percent rate of 
return. The combined annual recoverable copper available from these 12 
deposits is only 733,000 metric tons. At the beginning of July 1979, 
copper was selling for about $0.85 per pound. At this price, assuming 
no increase in costs of production, 22 additional properties could 
produce and receive at least a 15-percent rate of return. 

For U.S. producers to meet the average 1969-78 annual domestic pro- 
duction of 1,337,000 metric tons and receive at least a 15-percent rate 
of return on their capital investment, a copper price of $0.82 per pound 
is required ($0.72 at break-even). If the United States were to produce 
the additional 248,000 metric tons that were imported each year over 
this period, a copper price of $0.88 per pound would be required at a 15- 
percent rate of return ($0.76 at break-even). 

CONCLUSIONS 

Seventy-three domestic copper properties have been analyzed to deter- 
mine the quantity of copper available from each deposit and the copper price 
required to provide each operation with 0- and 15-percent rates of return. 
The 1978 domestic copper reserve base is 92 million metric tons of copper. 
Of this amount, an estimated 74 million metric tons are recoverable using 
current technology. 

A copper price of $2.07 per pound would be required if all properties, 
producing and nonproducing, were to at least break even. This price in- 
creases to $3.81 for the properties to receive at least a 15-percent rate 
of return. The average break-even copper price for properties producing 
in 1978, $0.66 per pound, was about equivalent to the average selling 
price for the year. At this price, analyses indicate that only 25 prop- 
erties could either produce at break-even or receive an operating profit. 
Of these properties, only 12 could receive at least a 15-percent rate of 
return. 



26 



Annual domestic copper production from 1969 to 1978 averaged 1,337,000 
metric tons. Based on the results of this study, in order to produce at 
this level and receive at least a 15-percent rate of return, a copper price 
of $0.82 per pound is required. If the United States were to produce the 
additional 248,000 metric tons that were imported each year over this 
period, a copper price of $0.88 would be necessary. 

Analysis has indicated that increases in copper price are required in 
order for many domestic deposits to continue to produce. Many U.S. producers 
cannot continue to operate at a copper price that has not kept pace witl] 
inflated operating and capital costs. Assuming copper demand and other 
market conditions warrant it, the increases in copper price that occurred 
in early 1979 will help provide the additional revenue necessary for 
many operations to continue producing and should encourage companies to 
begin developing other properties. 



27 



REFERENCES 

1. Arizona Mining Association. Arizona: Copper Capital, U.S.A. December 

1977, 24 pp. 

2. Bennett, H. J., L. Moore, L. E. Welborn, and J. E. Toland. An Economic 

Appraisal of the Supply of Copper from Primary Domestic Sources. 
BuMines IC 8598, 1973, 156 pp. 

3. Everett, F. D. , and H. J. Bennett. Evaluation of Domestic Reserves 

and Potential Sources of Ores Containing Copper, Lead, Zinc, and 
Associated Metals. BuMines IC 8325, 1967, 78 pp. 

4. Jacobs, H. M. (Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Inspiration 

Consolidated Copper Company (recently retired)). Testimony Before the 
United States International Trade Commission. Unalloyed Unwrought 
Copper. TA-201-32, USITC #905, August 23, 1978; available from 
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 701 E Street, 
N.W. , Washington, D.C. 20436. 

5. Lucy, R. (Vice President of Planning and Economics, Cities Service 

Company (Minerals Group)). Testimony Before the United States Inter- 
national Trade Commission. Unalloyed Unwrought Copper. TA-201-32, 
USITC #905, August 23, 1978; available from Secretary, United States 
International Trade Commission, 701 E Street, N.W. , Washington, D.C. 
20436. 

6. Rabogliatti, E. R. (Mayor, City of Globe, Ariz.) Testimony Before the 

United States International Trade Commission. Unalloyed Unwrought 
Copper. TA-201-32, USITC #905, August 23, 1978; available from 
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 701 E Street, 
N.W. , Washington, D.C. 20436. 

7. Schroeder, H. J. Private communication, 1979. Available upon request 

from H. J. Schroeder, Bureau of Mines, 2401 E St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 

8. Steckley, R. C. , and J. F. Lemons, Jr. A Method for Updating Cost 

Estimates for the Minerals Availability System. May 1976, 41 pp. 
Unpublished report, available for consultation at Bureau of Mines, 
Minerals Availability Field Office, Denver, Colo. 

9. U.S. President. The Economic Report to the Congress, January 19 77. 

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C, 1977, 282 pp. 

10. Winters, H. J. Financial Outlook for Western United States Porphyry 
Copper Mines. October 1977, 26 pp. Unpublished report, available 
for consultation at Bureau of Mines, Minerals Availability Field 
Office, Denver, Colo. 



28 



o o o 
o o o 



o o o 

O Q 



n)>-ionooo>-ivj 
o o • o • • .00 



a. • • 


K 


• 


. • 





• 


L M 


1 

u 





<u -a oj 


OJ 


13 



U XJ (Ji C 



c 


<u 


a. 





c 





•H 


m 


iH 


4-1 


■H 


lU 


m 


^ 


> 


Vj 


(1) 


(1) 








a 



O 4J D. -H C 

^ 4-1 X e o 

S OJ O W tH 

CU O 0)4-1 

01 U 0) 4-1 3 tS 

o u c c o t4 

CO c O ^1 -H 

-H ^J 0) ^ QJ CL 

.H n) i^ 3 6 m 



H 


B 


R 


•H 


•H 


•H 




CO 


^ 











•D 


XI 


-0 


UJ 


01 


CU 



CO C -H 00 

n c o o -a 



CO 




U 


CO 


c 


CJ 


t/J 


0) 


i-i 


vj m 


<n (u 




m 


ji: 


8 


■H D. 


3 T) 


.H 


t; 


H 


o..-{ 


V4 -H 


CO 








en CU 


a 


> 


• 


• 


■ 


c x: 


>> 


3 


.H 


CM 


m 


M PL, 





« 



H 


(i4 


en 




^ 


1 


0) 









p 






XI 


3 


X 


-n 


CU 





a 


a) 


+J 




4- 


4-1 


c 


C11 


c 


CO 


CU 


(U 


CU 



O U '4-* U CO 4-) 



• 


a) 


•H 





0) 


CD 


CO 





en 


m 


-H 


nH 


CO 




a 




0) 


1 


XI 


1 




T1 


0) 


X) 


CU 


CU 


4J 


CU 


4-1 


4-1 


CO 


4-1 



4J CO C CJ C O 
CO 4-1 <u O CU X3 
o en 4-1 -— I 4-1 



u o 

fen 
a 

E CU f-l 
DO 2: eu 
CO s: 



■a 
c 

C4-I 


4-1 
C 
CU 

e 


; 









CU 


• 






3 


CO 


• 






CO 


c 








C 


CU 


CO 


XJ 


X! 


X 


U 


y: 




• 




3 
pa 




• 


• 





rH el) rH 

CO e co 


CU CO 


C C 


4-1 C 


rt 


CO 



1 a 
i 4- 






a 
4- 




n: 


(U 
4J 



CO en CO 
•H en > 
■a (la -H 



X 
D. euoi 
CO X) • 
SCO 















• 


C 



















c 

























>, 

















C 


en 


c 




C 








el) 




■H 


c 


CO 

















en 


c. 


e ) 




CLJ 








C 


Cj 


CO 


n 




CT 








X 


CO 


c 


03 


'-I 


n 


N 


eu 






1- 


U 


f- 






ell 


C 





• • 


-0 -r- 


CJ) 




}-i 


en 


jr 


CI 


c 


CO 


efl X 







eu 


-1 


c) 


>- 


QJ 


C 


XI ei 


CO 




D. 


M 


eO 


(1 


i-i 





M = 


en 


J- 


0. 


0.^ 


c 


u 


N 


CO ^ 


CO 


X 





>^ 


3 


CI 




•H 


EC 


pe- 





l_ 


u 


U 


Q 


fc 


b 



4J 4-1 M X 



•H en 


CO 


D. HI 


y 


en j^ 


00 


C CO 


CO 


M ,-1 


S 



29 



o o o 
o o o 

iH rH ■-! 



in o o o o o in 
-a- o in m o m <N 



in o o o o 
^ (D o o o 



O O O rH <J> 

o o o m ~a- 



o vj o o o 

T3 OJ t3 13 X) 



O O O O 1-1 

T3 -a T3 -a 0) 



to o Dd 
> u < 



rH W a) O -H o 



c .H o c E 



•H 4_) d 4-) 



^ CO CO • o CU CL 

QJCUt^O-UcuCl.^' 

c c ti ij o li o 

•H -H CU O rH -H O C_) 

a 2 4-1 u -H > o 



CO en I— I • 

O a. ni '^ 

3 >^ 4-1 

•a u 3 



CN M rH CNJ Oi M <N 



e I 



CO en 
CO 
CD I 



CO 4-1 > a> 



C CI) CU 1 u 
3 -H C l-i o:: 







CO 


CU 


1 


1 


CD 


CO 






nH 


CO 


-o 


T) 




CU 


CU 


aj 


^ 


tH 


4-1 


4-1 


CO 




d 


c 


u 


CU 


til 


<u 


CU 


4-1 


4-1 


4-1 


-a 


CO 


crt 


rt 


CU 


4J 


P14 


Cu 


tu 


cn 




cfl en 
CD n3 
OJ CU 



4J 4-J -l-t 4-1 cO 



j_i 4-) -H "O 



• • 4-1 
. . CO 

. • I-l 
. • o 

V • '3 


QJ • • • • 
u - • • • 


• t-i 

• ex 



O O U CD y) 



,-1 CM m 


<f 


m ^ 


CM CN CN 


CN 


r-j (N 



C» CT\ 


o ^ 


CM m <r in 


CM CM 


m en 


m en en m 



w o to 

CO to Oh 

CO CU 

M ^J r-H 
CO 

•H 'H U 

B a 5i 

CO to C 

•H ^ tH 

s s s 



C 1= O "-1 ^ 
CO CU < o 
c/3 i-i 3 V — CO 



• c 


a. 


(1) 




N 




CJ 




, 


T 


to 


CO 


CD 


u 


. 3 


c 


rs 


^ 




T1 


CU 


T5 


CU 


C 


R 


4-1 




3 


. O 


n 




^ 


r. 




(2 


U 


Lin 


CO 


CO 


•H 


u 






u 


T1 


o 


n 


n 


r 


o 


T1 


; ^ 


^ 


V4 


CD 




a 




c. 


14-1 


•H 






UH 


o 




to 




> 


c 


>i T3 


t) 


CO 


4H 


4J 


U-J 


>^ 


C4H 


Q 


C 


£<i 


CU 


-H 


•H 


(0 CU 


to 




CO 


m 


CO 




CO 




CO 








3 


Qi ai 


c/) 




CO 




w 




(rt 




CO 




CAl 


CO 


H 



.H -H c -:»; 



30 



i 




M 


c 


J 


•H 


CQ 


tU 


<: 


E 


H 


O 



a. 
to t3 



cuts 



^ 'H O 'H 



T3 U U i-l 






^1 



c o c 
to u n 



Cu o 

a. .J 
o 



3 >^ 

•-! 

01 o 



4-1 >i u a. 



to 


0) • 




-H 


3 • 


.. (U 


c 


c u 


C 3 


M 


■H 0) 


nj cr 


o 


u M 


00 M 


4H 


c ^ 


•H (U 


■H 


o m 


J3 U 


.H 


cj 3 


O Oh 


nj 




•H 



^ s 





0) 


f-i 


& 




CO 


to 


•H 


0) 


to 


t4 


^ 


4-1 


01 


CD 


CO 


nj 


rH 


T3 


M 


> 




OJ 


OJ 


U 


^ 


fa 




P. 


1-4 


1 


o 


1 


•o 


CU 


01 




<u 


Cfl 


OJ 


<u 


b4 


to 


MH 



rH dl CU tU 

CA 4-1 CO 

1) to to to 

4-) tU > OJ 



■■ X 

to to 

4-1 S 



1 


O, 


to 


(U to 


<1) 


CO 




•H 


o 


CO tj 


CO 


o 


OJ 


x: 


o 


to o 


to 


o 


CQ 


CO 


T— I 


CU r-i 


OJ 


rH 


to 


iH 




rH 


rH 




OJ 


11 


1 


1 




1 


iH 


g 


13 


cu 


n 


■o 


0) 


o 


<U 


CO (U 


u 


<u 


4-1 




4-1 


> 4-1 


fU 


4-1 


CO 


OJ 


c 


•H c 


■a 


t5 


> 


cu 


<u 


VI <u 


cu 


cu 


H 


•M 


4J 


a. 4-1 


fc, 


4J 


M 




to 


to 




CO 



c 


h 


I c 


cu 




4J 


a 


to 


a 


3 



to (U 

C 4J 

to 4-1 

4J 3 



o . • 

14 C3 O 
CU T) TS 



-D 


a J3 


3 


U 3 


CO 


O CO 


•~^ 


O vx 


. 


p • 


a 


a<s 




& 


CO 


O to 


T) 


O -o 


C 


t= 





4J O 


o 


4J O 


CO 


o to 


^ 


0) < 




ti 


lU 


CJ CD 


J3 


a) J2 


H 


ii H 



T3 rH S O M 



31 



•H U 

u 



OJ -rH i< Q 



^ H 



• 


o 


3 




3 


, 


• 


o 


o 


^ 




o 


X 


x: 


• 


•a 


• 


au 


■H 


11 




u 


X 


4J 


o 


c 


• 


u 




4-1 


D. 






w 


^ 


CJ 


M 


o 


o 


u 


CO 


CO 




y) 




o 






Ji 


o 


cu 


u 


Cl- 




^ 


4-1 


z 


c 


4-1 


i-H 




CI. 


o 






(0 


o 




o 


M 


CO 


^ 


ex ^ 


-a 




j-i 




■o 


'H 


a) 


£ 


o 


(X 


CD 




dj 


>. 


c 


4-1 


^4 


•H 


■H 


u 


X 


4-1 




c 


u 


rt 


n) 


o 


s 


c 




w 


CO 




■H 


CO 




4-) 


tL, 




•H 


4-1 




T3 




y 




o 


^ 




tn 


2 


^ 


CO 


■H 






-o 


00 


o 


l-l 


0) 




o 


•a 


^ 


a 


c 


■H 


to 


D. 


(U 


-H 


3 


o 


c 


O 


c 


o 


U) 


o 


U) 


c 


V4 


CO 


(U 


CO 


01 


l-H 


X 


^ 


•rH 


C 


c 


CO 


OJ 


c 


u 


C 




X 


3 


^ 


m 


o 


J= 


J3 


c 




o 




u 


« 


u 


^ 


u 


o 


e 


(U 


2 


u 


X 


iH 




INI 


ro 


-cr 


CO 


i.^ 


.H 


CNJ 


1 



CO 


u 


^ 


1 '-I 


(U 


c/1 


O 


p 


M 


• -a 


3 


CU 


V d) -a 


O 


c 



o CO c: 4-1 cu o 

0) cu CO 0) 
QJ t-l 4-1 O C4-( cu 



C <U 
•H t3 
4-1 C 



Vj 4-) CU O V4 4-1 4J 

00 C tj u qi C r-^ 

L4 cu CO o o- cu <d 

C4-I JD 



•H n en o E en 

4-1 3 ^ (J 'H O 



cu 


J= 




S O 


cu 


i-( 




CO ti4 


en 


eu 




^ 


en 


P. 




OO V4 


cu 


Q- 




c: >-i 


d 


O 


£. 


•r-i CO 


c 


ej 


CO 


CU o 


cu 
H 




3 





v-^ 



I \ 



^ I J 



pD 



18 




4 o 




•0.. ''f,^^«» "P. a'* * 



^ "<^ * . » ■' o, 









o 





















I*' .-i;^-. >, 







4 o 






,0' 




-. .J> » o « o ' c,^ 

<•-?► ''^fe. "^^ .^ »: 



<. 




• cj;5?Jts,.,.' o 




^U o " -f O 







,<^^ 



<" 









v-o^ 








- -JL 















^-^^ 



"y »''^'* ^ 




\ -^^ A^ ^'^ 


















./■^-^ 










cj ^ 



> 



.^^ 









6? >s> 



^> 






o 



"^^ .^ .^^%i^^. %^^^^ ;^', %/ y^. \^^^ :^, \^ 

^1 ^^V/^, 














